Category Archives: The Big Bad World

At about 1 am, I was working out in the screen porch when I heard a strange noise coming from the woods. At first, thought it was odd, but I assumed it would go away. It didn't. Eventually I grabbed one of the school's H4N digital recorders and when out in the front yard to record it. I took Irie.

I recorded about 12 minutes total. I removed the first few minutes of me fumbling with doors and the drone of the window fan in our bedroom above. I also cut out twenty seconds between the last cry and Irie beginning to woof. Then I cut out another full minute from the last sound Irie makes to me telling her to come in. I ran a noise reducer over the whole things to cut out my breathing and the sound of me peeing my pants.

I was aghast after the NH primary to hear an NHPR story in which formerly undecided women--and even women who HAD decided on other candidates-- said that they closed the curtain and realized it was more important to vote for Clinton because she's a woman than to vote for the candidate whose stance on the issues they had supported (and that's essentially what Morgan is saying in this article that Robin DeRosa sent, right?). The same story had a quip from a (female) supporter of Obama saying that his support hadn't really materialized because NH folks were more racist than they wanted to admit. So that's the deal? If I oppose Clinton based on my take on the issues (which I do) or her record (which I do) am I REALLY a sexist? If I oppose Obama on the issues (which I do) or on his record (he has none) am I REALLY a racist? I supported Edwards--a southern white male--does that indicate my latent Klan loyalties or is there still room to focus on the issues?

No doubt--Clinton has been the target of subtle and obvious sexism. It's deplorable. But I'm really struggling with this. Should outrage over her treatment be enough to overcome my reservations about her platform and her record? She voted FOR the USAPATRIOT act. She voted FOR the Iraq War. She only voiced opposition to those things when they became unpopular. Compared to Edwards and DK, her health-care plan will be too complex, help fewer people, and continues to empower big Pharm- and big-HMOs to suck the blood from the poor and middle-class. She has raised more money from the health care and oil industries than any candidate still in the race. She won't say when we can leave Iraq. On and on...do I ignore that because she's a woman and it's her turn?

Ditto for Obama. It's shameful that he has to tout his Kansas (read "white") accent in order to court favor. That doesn't change the fact that he was voting on speed limits for county highways when Clinton, Edwards, DK, and the rest were wrestling with national/world issues. That doesn't change the fact that his pathetic health care plan is only the slightest possible improvement to the status quo and continues to empower big Pharm- and big-HMOs etc. He DOES seem to want to undo some of the harm done by NAFTA, but it sounds like too little, too late for me.

I think Clinton AND Obama are better bets on the environment than any Republican so I'll vote for any Democrat that can capture the nomination. In fact, I probably lean slightly toward Clinton's platform. But now I'm depressed. I've despaired of any hope that we can seriously address the health care crisis or quickly end the war with either of these two. There are no liberals in the race, just two centrist "New-Democrats" with their fingers to the wind. Even worse, the party that split over civil rights may well trade big ideas for identity politics. I'm not equating Robin Morgan to Strom Thurmond, but it's sad (and scary) to think that Democrats would come to believe that gender, race, and so on are better reasons to vote for a candidate than their beliefs, behaviors, abilities and policies.

"Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation. Enough clever straddling, enough not offending anyone This is not a Dick Morris election. Sen. Clinton is apparently incapable of taking a clear stand on the war in Iraq, and that alone is enough to disqualify her. Her failure to speak out on Terri Schiavo, not to mention that gross pandering on flag-burning, are just contemptible little dodges."

Amen! If there has ever been a time to offer a REAL alternative the republican machine, this is it. This piece doesn't mention Kerry, but he's just as orange (yellow + red) as Hillary, Biden, and Liebowitz. Have all of the likely Dems from the senate gone orange?

Did the phone jamming scheme actually put Sununu over the top in his extremely narrow 2002 race against Jean "Capitulation Machine" Shaheen? Maybe not, but it was definitely a factor. Now that they've convicted someone at the national party level--after they already sent two other state-level hacks to jail--I'm wondering if they can (or will) investigate even higher up the chain.

To be honest, I'm interested in this story purely out of alarm at Republican election tactics rather than outrage that we missed another opportunity to be represented by Shaheen. Considering Shaheen's dedication to Clintonian focus-group-ideology, I think she would have represented us much the same as Sununu--i.e., her focus groups and handlers would have instructed her to vote for the war in Iraq, for the tax cuts, etc. Still, a job in the senate might have kept her hands off of the Kerry steering wheel in '04.

Seriously. I know very few people who are as articuate and passionate about politics as Tony. My hope: the guy will become a blogger extraordinaire and get to cover the NH primaries in 2008. He and I disagreed in 2004, but he was far more articulate than I when it came to arguing his points. If he had been right (like me), in addition to all that purty talk, he would probably be commenting for ABC News right now.

Of course, he and Kate have a baby girl on the way so he's worried about another time committment. Tony, what else are you going to do for the first six months while the baby screams all night? The sound of typing is very soothing... Tony, blog baby.